Tag Archives: UFO

SETI, Leslie Kean, and staying stuck

Leslie Kean, the great journalist who’s the subject of  two of my recent posts, writes about crop circles and about UFOs. Seeing her in the media is a squirm.

Leslie is interviewed in a 9-minutes segment on Seth Shostak’s weekly radio show. Seth heads up SETI. The interview is a classic example of the media fog machine and of why fundamental change is resisted by the powers that be. With a possibility of the biggest story ever, why cynicism and suppression? Aha. Seth Shostak would be out of job if the intelligence he is looking for already has arrived.

My hat’s off to Billy Cox, writing in DeVoid: The mainstream media’s lonely UFO web log. He skewers Seth Shostak deliciously, and it’s a pleasure for anyone who likes to see the bad guys get theirs.

Weird scenes inside the gold mine

by Billy Cox

The SETI Institute’s podcast interview with journalist Leslie Kean on Monday should be Exhibit A in the case to disqualify it from any future American media discussions on UFOs. That won’t happen, of course, but if you’re on the fence about SETI’s mind set, you need to give this a serious listen(Link). When it comes to sophistry, SETI’s “Skeptic Check: The Saucer’s Apprentice” is stone-cold gold.

Hosted by astronomer Seth Shostak, the SETI thing — also known as “Our Monthly Look at Critical Thinking” — was 50 minutes of mostly rehash bemoaning the lack of UFO evidence to study. It featured the predictable reassurances of experts like Phil “Bad Astronomy” Plait and Skeptical Inquirer managing editor Benjamin Radford, alongside Harvard alien abduction skeptic Susan Clancy. There was also an attempt to nudge Indiana University folklorist/abduction researcher Thomas Bullard into the skeptic’s corner, but alien abduction is another discussion altogether.

What made the session noteworthy was its invitation to Kean, whose skillfully presented UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record(Link) confronts debunkers with their most formidable challenge in recent memory. But it became immediately clear that Shostak (“I have an open mind”) not only wasn’t interested in evidence, he probably hadn’t bothered to read the book.

In his subsequent discussion with Radford, Shostak stated: “The other argument that’s frequently made is that scientists simply dismiss this phenomenon out of hand, that they won’t look, and this is one of the arguments in the new book by Leslie Kean … that there may be something real here and nobody will look at it …”

“Well, there’s a couple of errors right there,” Radford replied. “First of all, UFO sightings have been investigated. The claim that the U.S. government has never looked into these things is patently false. They have looked into these things …”

Whoa, time out. Kean mentioned Project Blue Book, the USAF study, in On the Record. Who claimed Uncle Sam “has never looked into these things”? Nobody. Except maybe Radford. Shostak, who didn’t bother to correct him, is a clever guy who really knows how to bait the hook. Here’s how he opened the Q&A with Radford:

“Ben, in your long career as someone who has investigated UFOs and sorted through the evidence, has there ever been a case that convinced you that aliens have visited the planet?”

Who said anything about aliens? Kean’s book dealt with an extraterrestrial hypothesis — the hypothesis that keeps SETI in business — but as she told Shostak earlier on the show, “I’m not even willing to assume that these are aliens.” On the Record deals with radar data, military reports, analysis of plant and soil damage, photo analysis, etc. Reviewing the data doesn’t amount to endorsing aliens. Shostak knows that. And yet, his tortured contortions to avoid said evidence are becoming cartoonish.

“You say a lot of them are disc-shaped,” he countered to Kean, “but isn’t the fact that we call them flying saucers, that we expect them to be disc-shaped, simply due to a reporter’s error back in 1947, when Kenneth Arnold … said he saw objects that moved across the sky like saucers skipping in water, he wasn’t describing the shape of course, he was describing the motion, and ever since, people have seen saucers — that strikes me as a little odd.”

Kean corrected him by mentioning the multiple shapes on record, and added that the USAF coined the UFO term for accuracy’s sake. Shostak was all over the board, even invoking Carl Jung’s collective unconscious as a possible explanation for abductions without mentioning how the Swiss psychoanalyst ultimately concluded UFOs had a physical component that could not be confined to symbolic projections(Link) .

Kean was interviewed for half an hour, knowing in advance their discussion would be trimmed for length. Two UFO cases came up: the 2006 Chicago O’Hare incident, and the 1989-90 Belgian triangle wave. The latter involved an F-16 scramble, radar data, detailed photo analysis, and a military press conference assembled by the colonel in charge of the Air Force investigation, who would later become a Major General . You don’t need a crystal ball to figure out which incident got sliced out of  Kean’s nine-minute segment.

The Belgian investigation, “which included a group of university scientists working on it outside of the government,” Kean wrote in an e-mail to De Void, “would have made a strong case for the listeners as to the genuine mystery here. The O’Hare case does not have the same level of gravitas because it was not repeated, and because it didn’t involve an official investigation and a report by a Major General, who had worked closely with scientists over an extended period.”

Shostak, naturally, had an explanation for everything. “Our choice of which parts of each interview to run were based on using the most compelling and clear stories,” he e-mailed De Void. “I think that O’Hare won out over the Belgian wave because of its immediacy, fame, and relevancy to our broadcast audiences. It certainly wasn’t an attempt to ‘load the dice’ in any way I can assure you.”

Maybe the weirdest part of “Our Monthly Look at Critical Thinking” was the kicker, reserved for a discussion of the best Hollywood ET spacecraft. For eight fetish-like minutes, Shostak and sidekick Molly Bentley detailed the special properties and features of the make-believe hardware in “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” “District 9,” “Independence Day,” and 1953’s “War of the Worlds.”

De Void asked flat out if Shostak had actually read Kean’s book. Or the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena’s analysis of the O’Hare incident(Link) (a former NASA guy led the study). Or, for that matter, MUFON’s radar-saturated report(Link) on the 2008 Stephenville incident.

No reply yet on those questions. But we’ll keep you posted.

A trip down memory lane with Leslie Kean

There’s a lot of buzz now about Leslie Kean’s new book — I brought you a clip of her on MSNBC, being interviewed about it. Well, I went back and dug out how I first came across Leslie. Here’s a post I made, that still sings the right song, on my old html site.

From my CROP CIRCLE DIARY

September 18, 2002

The crop circle world is buzzing with this excellent article, “Origin of crop circles baffles scientists,” written by Leslie Kean, an outstanding journalist. She is among the few mainstream reporters whose articles on scientifically taboo issues have been carried by the mainstream press.

THE PROVIDENCE JOURNAL

Leslie Kean: Origin of crop circles baffles scientists

SINCE THE RECENT release of the movie Signs, crop circles have been thrust into the limelight. Major publications such as Scientific American and U.S. News and World Report have echoed the common belief that all crop circles are made by stealthy humans flattening plants with boards. This assumption would be fair enough if we had no information suggesting otherwise.

However, intriguing data published in peer-reviewed scientific journals clearly establishes that some of these geometric designs, found in dozens of countries, are not made by “pranks with planks.” In fact, a study about to be published by a team of scientists and funded by Laurance Rockefeller concludes “it is possible that we are observing the effects of a new or as yet undiscovered energy source.”

In the early 1990s, biophysicist William C. Levengood, of the Pinelandia Biophysical Laboratory, in Michigan, examined plants and soils from 250 crop formations, randomly selected from seven countries. Samples and controls were provided by the Massachusetts-based BLT Research Team, directed by Nancy Talbott.

Levengood, who has published over 50 papers in scientific journals, documented numerous changes in the plants from the formations. Most dramatic were grossly elongated plant nodes (the “knuckles” along the stem) and “expulsion cavities” — holes literally blown open at the nodes — caused by the heating of internal moisture from exposure to intense bursts of radiation. The steam inside the stems escaped by either stretching the nodes or, in less elastic tissue, exploding out like a potato bursting open in a microwave oven.

Seeds taken from the plants and germinated in the lab showed significant alterations in growth, as compared with controls. Effects varied from an inability to develop seeds to a massive increase in growth rate — depending on the species, the age of the plants when the circle was created and the intensity of the energy system involved.

These anomalies were also found in tufts of standing plants inside crop circles — clearly not a result of mechanical flattening — and in patches of randomly downed crops found near the geometric designs. These facts suggested some kind of natural, but unknown, force at work.

Published in Physiologia Plantarum (1994), the international journal of the European Societies of Plant Physiology, Levengood’s data showed that “plants from crop circles display anatomical alterations which cannot be explained by assuming the formations are hoaxes.” He defined a “genuine” formation as one “produced by external energy forces independent of human influence.”

In another paper for Physiologia Plantarum (1999), Levengood and Talbott suggested that the energy causing crop circles could be an atmospheric plasma vortex — multiple interacting electrified air masses that emit microwaves as they spiral around the earth’s magnetic-field lines.

Some formations, however, contain cubes and straight lines. Astrophysicist Bernard Haisch, of the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics, says that such “highly organized, intelligent patterns are not something that could be created by a force of nature.”

But Haisch points out that since not all formations are tested, it is unknown how many are genuine. Nor is it likely that such complex designs could evolve so quickly in nature. “Natural phenomena make mountain ranges and form continents — they don’t learn geometry in ten years,” says Haisch, who is the science editor for the Astrophysical Journal.

In 1999, philanthropist Laurance Rockefeller made possible the most definitive — and most revealing — study to date. The BLT Research Team collected hundreds of plant and soil samples from a seven-circle barley formation in Edmonton, Canada. The plants had both elongated nodes and expulsion cavities, and the soils contained the peculiar iron spheres, indicating a genuine formation. The controls showed none of these changes.

Mineralogist Sampath Iyengar, of the Technology of Materials Laboratory, in California, examined specific heat-sensitive clay minerals in these soils, using X-ray diffraction and a scanning electron microscope. He discovered an increase in the degree of crystallinity (the ordering of atoms) in the circle minerals, which statistician Ravi Raghavan determined was statistically significant at the 95 percent level of confidence.

“I was shocked,” says Iyengar, a 30-year specialist in clay mineralogy. “These changes are normally found in sediments buried for thousands and thousands of years under rocks, affected by heat and pressure, and not in surface soils.”

Also astounding was the direct correlation between the node-length increases in the plants and the increased crystallization in the soil minerals — indicating a common energy source for both effects. Yet the scientists could not explain how this would be possible. The temperature required to alter soil crystallinity would be between 1,500 and 1,800 degrees F. This would destroy the plants.

Understanding the possible ramifications of these findings, Talbott sought the expertise of an emeritus professor of geology and mineralogy at Dartmouth College, Robert C. Reynolds Jr., who is former president of the Clay Minerals Society. He is regarded by his colleagues as the “best-known expert in the world” on X-ray diffraction analysis of clay minerals.

Reynolds determined that the BLT Team’s data had been “obtained by competent personnel, using current equipment.”

The intense heat required for the observed changes in crystallinity “would have incinerated any plant material present,” he confirms in a statement for the Rockefeller report. “In short, I believe that our present knowledge provides no explanation.”

Meteorologist James W. Deardorff, professor emeritus at the College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences at Oregon State University, and previously a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, states in a 2001 Physiologia Plantarum commentary that the variety, complexity and artistry of crop circles “represent the work of intelligence,” and not a plasma vortex. “That is why the hoax hypothesis has been popularly advocated,” he says.

However, he points out, the anomalous properties in plant stems thoroughly documented by Levengood and Talbott could not possibly have been implemented by hoaxers. Deardorff describes one 1986 British formation in which upper and lower layers of crop were intricately swirled and bent perpendicular to each other, in a fashion that “defies any explanation.”

“People don’t want to face up to this, and scientists have to deal with the ridicule factor,” he said in a recent interview.

Adding to the puzzle, professional filmmakers have documented bizarre daytime “balls of light” at crop-circle sites. Light phenomena were observed by multiple witnesses at the site of the Canadian circle so meticulously examined under the Rockefeller grant.

Eltjo Hasselhoff, a Dutch experimental physicist, has taken on the study of what he describes as “bright, fluorescent flying light objects,sized somewhere between an egg and a football.”

Scientists face real and serious questions in confronting this mystery. Could this be secret laser technology beamed down from satellites? Is it a natural phenomenon? Is there a consciousness or intelligence directing an energy form yet unknown to us?

“To look at the evidence and go away unconvinced is one thing,” says astrophysicist Haisch. “To not look at the evidence and be convinced against it … is another. That is not science.” It’s not good journalism, either.

Leslie Kean is an investigative reporter and producer with Pacifica Radio based in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Here’s her bio today:

Author of the new book UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, published by the Crown Publishing Group/Random House (www.UFOsOnTheRecord.com). The book includes a foreword by John Podesta and first-person contributions written by highly credible military and government officials from nine countries, including five Generals.

Kean is an independent investigative journalist who has been published nationally and internationally in the Boston Globe, Philadelphia Inquirer, Atlanta-Journal Constitution, Providence Journal, International Herald Tribune, Globe and Mail, Sydney Morning Herald, The Nation, and The Journal for Scientific Exploration, among other publications. She is coauthor of Burma’s Revolution of the Spirit: The Struggle for Democratic Freedom and Dignity, and was also a producer and on-air host for a daily investigative news program on KPFA radio, a Pacifica station.

Kean began publishing on the UFO subject in 2000, when her feature story about the French COMETA Report appeared in the Boston Globe. In 2002, she co-founded the Coalition for Freedom of Information (CFi), an independent alliance advocating for greater government openness on information about UFOs and for responsible coverage by the media based on a rational and credible approach. As director of the CFi, she began working on the Kecksburg UFO case in 2002, with the cooperation of Stan Gordon. Kean was the plaintiff in a successful, four-year Freedom of Information Act federal lawsuit against NASA, in which the agency was required to release hundreds of documents under court supervision. She and her coalition have launched an ongoing initiative to affect US government policy so that scientists and aviation authorities can gain greater understanding of the still-unexplained UFO phenomenon.

Kean was a producer for the 2009 independent documentary I Know What I Saw, directed by James Fox, and is currently working with Break Thru Films, an award-winning film company, on a new feature documentary. She lives in New York.

See award winning new UFO movie free!

I’m beyond pleased to be able to bring a gift to this list, thanks to the incredible generosity of my ally, Terje Toftenes, a Norwegian filmmaker who is a mainstay of the crop circle world. When people want to know what other circle film besides mine i would recommend, it’s Terje’s CROP CIRCLES: Crossovers From Another Dimension.

I was just with Terje at the 2010 Paranormal Symposium and Film Festival, where we both won awards, and I would have expected that if you’d wanted to see his film, The Day Before Disclosure, you’d have had to have bought this very extensive report on all that makes the UFO situation credible. However, Terje is making it available to be watched free. This is a wonderful gift that I’m thrilled to bring to you.

Watch it at http://www.thedaybeforedisclosure.com! On that site, you also can see full interviews Terje conducted with people who are in the film.

As evidence has been coming to the forefront lately, here is another opportunity for confirmation of how real the existence of UFOs is.